The roots of Indian democracy

 

Friends,
              At present democracy and the concept of  Aam Aadmi i.e the common folk of our country has come to  the center stage of our polity. But to plainspeak the concept of these two terms is not very clear among the vast majority of the educated Indians, not to speak of the common folk. In our educational system, it is taught that the concept of Indian democracy has been borrowed from the west through the British and American system of democracy. But we have not been able to relate the concept of democracy to our history and civilization. If we ponder through the pages of Indian history we shall find that during the times of Gautama Buddha in the sixth century B.C there existed the Ganas i.e Republics similar to the city states of Athens. The principal Ganas were the Vaishalis and Licchhivis of North India. But due to the limitations of the ancient Republics they could not withstand the monolithic might of the monarchy like that of the Magadha kingdom. Actually. the monarchy of Magadha was a completely  totalitarian state where serfdom prevailed as a social system. In my view. Chanakya the guide and Prime Minister of the founder of Maurya empire Chandra Gupta Maurya was the pioneer of the Indian democracy in its typical monarcical  form. Chanakya was the first person in ancient India besides Sri Ramchandra and Sri Krishna who framed the rules by which a  King was supposed  to be guided. That was the first check on the totalitarian nature of the Indian monarchy. In that sense, the Maurya and Gupta empires were democratic in nature as per the limitations of the historical period. It means that democracy does not necessarily mean a system but the attitude of the ruler who weilds a particular system of government. In that sense, the Ram Rajya concept of Sri Ram and the Dharma Rajya concept of Sri Krishna was also democratic in essence. Actually, the willingness of Sri Ram to forsake the throne which was his legally due to him asserts the democratic spirit of his personality. That is why, our Father of Nation Mahatma Gandhi declared Ram Rajya as his ideal. It was said that during his rule, the tiger and the goat drank  from the same stream or ghaat. This depiction actually shows the peaceful co-existence of opposing interest groups  with the government playing the role of the noble hearted guardian. If we compare the scenario with that of the present administration we shall find that a particular political group which had been at the helm of affairs of the government for the major period of the pre-independence period has applied the British policy of divide and rule which has cost the Indian nation too much. Now, if we want to trace the roots of Indian democracy then we have to delve into the pre-independence period of the modern history of our country. Mahatma Gandhi’s dream of India was not the one which was persued by his successors. The Father of nation wanted to make India into a Gram Swaraj, where every village would be socially. economically and politically self reliant. He wanted to rejuvenate the village and cottage industries which the British rulers had mercilessly destroyed for their colonial interests. The greatest contribution of Mahatma Gandhi to the Freedom movement was that he hit at the basic weapon of the imperialists which was the big industries of England which had vested interest in the Indian market. He wanted to give more emphasis on the labour intensive industries than on the capital intensive industries which creates wealth for the few and unemployment and poverty for the millions of people. My basic point is that the successors of Mahatma Gandhi who do not waste a single moment in showering verbal homage to the Mahatma, actually destroyed the very ideal of a self reliant India free from exploitation and deprivation. History shows the government of India headed by Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru was very close to the British empire. Pt. Nehru had completely ruled out pulling out of the Commonwealth which was the call of the nationalists in that period. Plainspeaking, Pandit Nehru was more impressed by the development of science and technology in the west but was not much aware about the History and the typical cultural heritage of India. He was not farsighted like that of Mahatma Gandhi or Sardar Patel who had warned Pt. Nehru about the dubious policies of China. Sardar Patel’s fear about the Chinese intentions came true in 1962 war of aggression. The Indian National Congress formed under the Great Grand old man Dada Bhai Naoroji, nursed by the saintly politician Gopal Krishna Gokhale and invigorated by the mass participation by Mahatma Gandhi was in due course of time transformed into the family property of Pt. Jawaharlal Nehru  and his daughter Sm. Indira Gandhi. It is irony of history that the pary Indian National Congress which ruled our Pyaara Hindustan for more than forty years never looked beyond the dynastic rule of the Nehru-Gandhi family. This doest not necessarily mean that the Congress under the Nehru-Gandhi dynastic rule did not do some good to the country. It did help to build the Indian capitalist economy on a firm footing. But then it has also created two countries in India. One that is the affluent and rich upper middle class which looks on itself as a new edition of westerners and less like an Indian. This is India, the shining one and the other Bharat or Hindustan of the millions of poor peasants, half starved, illiterate barely meeting two ends meet and always in debt. I remember an Indian economist who had said about the peasants of India that he is born in debt, lives in debt and dies in debt. Things have not changed much from that till now. We almost regularly read news about the farmers and peasants committing suicide because of ever burdening debt. So, the potiticians of India irrespective of political affiliation have to answer the Yaksha Prasna of today’s polity that where is the mass or the Aam Aadmi about whom the fire brand youth leader of Congress Rahul Gandhi talks in his  plan of action. Today. The basic question is not doing patch work here and there but overhauling the total system in the broader interest of the country and her people as a whole.